test: Reduce usage of singelton within our tests and implementations #1331
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
aepfli
changed the title
aepfli
force-pushed
the
feat/improve-tests
branch
5 times, most recently
from
65dab59 to
0ff7ece
Compare
aepfli
changed the title
aepfli
force-pushed
the
feat/improve-tests
branch
3 times, most recently
from
20b50c7 to
be2a2f5
Compare
Our tests are great, but often we rely on our own Singelton for testing purposes. This can create concurrency issues or make testing really hard. By instantiating a own API object for each test we ensure that we are not messing with each other. Furthermore we should not use `.getInstance()` within our own implementation. Signed-off-by: Simon Schrottner <[email protected]>
aepfli
force-pushed
the
feat/improve-tests
branch
from
be2a2f5 to
22824c8
Compare
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1331 +/- ##
============================================
+ Coverage 93.04% 93.23% +0.19%
- Complexity 466 467 +1
============================================
Files 43 43
Lines 1121 1123 +2
Branches 90 90
============================================
+ Hits 1043 1047 +4
+ Misses 49 48 -1
+ Partials 29 28 -1
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
The good part is, the constructor is not public but protected, and always have been. Hence either people need to extend the API object, or have to be in the same package. This is already possible, so we are actually not changing anything regarding this behavior |
chrfwow
reviewed
Feb 17, 2025
Signed-off-by: Simon Schrottner <[email protected]>
aepfli
force-pushed
the
feat/improve-tests
branch
2 times, most recently
from
c324962 to
739204d
Compare
chrfwow
reviewed
Feb 17, 2025
aepfli
force-pushed
the
feat/improve-tests
branch
from
739204d to
f53d459
Compare
Signed-off-by: Simon Schrottner <[email protected]>
aepfli
force-pushed
the
feat/improve-tests
branch
from
f53d459 to
93e14f7
Compare
Signed-off-by: Simon Schrottner <[email protected]>
chrfwow
approved these changes
Feb 18, 2025
|
toddbaert
approved these changes
Feb 18, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Our tests are great, but often we rely on our own Singleton for testing purposes. This can create concurrency issues or make testing really hard. By instantiating a own API object for each test we ensure that we are not messing with each other.
Furthermore we should not use
.getInstance()within our own implementation, which is now ensured with an ArchUnit test